• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

You want transparency don't you......well DON'T YOU????

j_j

Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
179
Likes
101
Location
My dining room.
#61
It isn't all that hard to get a really nice recording that mimics reasonably well the real event. And no one for the most part wants that recording. They want a stylish improvement on real.
So very, very true. Do you want the cough, the creak from the HVAC, the echo from the spot on the balcony, the bass stored in that recess in the ceiling.

Usually not. The problem with "accurate" (perceptually) recordings is that they get it all.

You rarely WANT rather a lot of it.
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
3,536
Likes
1,637
#62
I will make an observation here. If it did that (and I believe you) it was BUSTED. Kaput. I almost always qualify things to say "if it's not broken".

There is lots of "interesting" hardware out there. "interestings" is not usually a compliment! :)
I do think you said only a defective item would act this way.

Yet, I replaced the damaged light with no other problems from that CD player. I used it maybe 3 more years. AC, fridge, heat, other switching on/off of things never intruded or caused a hiccup or at least not one large enough to be noticed. I also saved that damaged light and tried it when I later had external DACs or newer CD players. Whatever noise was coming from that light didn't effect the other digital gear on hand. So some odd interaction one might not hit upon ever again.
 

Soniclife

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
399
Likes
81
Location
UK
#63
I believe skepticism towards experts - even in something as simple, straightforward as electrical engineering and information theory - is bigger today than ever before.
I'd be interested in seeing some sort of evidence to back that up, or disprove it. It feels like it's true, but thinking things were better in the past is always dangerous. For example I can remember many instances over the years of idiots arguing with my wife (a state registered dietician) about diet, being ignorant does not make people any less convinced they are right, especially if they think they remember once reading something in a newspaper they agreed with. The internet does seem to have weaponized stupidity.
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
1,060
Likes
364
#64
I'd be interested in seeing some sort of evidence to back that up, or disprove it. It feels like it's true, but thinking things were better in the past is always dangerous. For example I can remember many instances over the years of idiots arguing with my wife (a state registered dietician) about diet, being ignorant does not make people any less convinced they are right, especially if they think they remember once reading something in a newspaper they agreed with. The internet does seem to have weaponized stupidity.
@Soniclife , this is just one piece of documentation (though I dislike the political bent in this research):


If you read research in the social sciences, this (i.e. skepticism towards experts) is a big theme, so quite uncontroversial claim in those circles.

To add to the complexity of the issue: I am skeptical towards lots of experts myself (like some social science experts), but not in cases of intelligent design in electric engineering...
 
Last edited:

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,902
Likes
748
Location
UK
#65
If we were to show that taking the advice of experts had resulted in a government adopting a policy that had killed thousands of people, and that the government had then reversed its policy, could we say that scepticism of experts was amply justified?
 

Soniclife

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
399
Likes
81
Location
UK
#66
@Soniclife , this is just one piece of documentation (though I dislike the political bent in this research):


If you read research in the social sciences, this (i.e. skepticism towards experts) is a big theme, so quite uncontroversial claim in those circles.

To add to the complexity of the issue: I am skeptical towards lots of experts myself (like some social science experts), but not in cases of intelligent design in electric engineering...
That graph seems to show not so much an overall change in the trust of the overall population as something else going on, and for the last 15 years or so as the internet has become more part of people's lives, the red line looks to have stabilized, and the blue edge up. When does that graph go up to?
 

j_j

Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
179
Likes
101
Location
My dining room.
#67
I'd be interested in seeing some sort of evidence to back that up, or disprove it. It feels like it's true, but thinking things were better in the past is always dangerous. For example I can remember many instances over the years of idiots arguing with my wife (a state registered dietician) about diet, being ignorant does not make people any less convinced they are right, especially if they think they remember once reading something in a newspaper they agreed with. The internet does seem to have weaponized stupidity.
I'm not sure. The number of luddite audiophiles has gone down a bit, but the number of evolution deniers and climate deniers seems to be snowballing, despite the overwhelming evidence for both from every direction.

The whole anti-science movement is fueled by pretty much everyone who has something to gain by exploiting a group of people.
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
3,536
Likes
1,637
#68
I've seriously heard it proclaimed that being stupid is a human right. I suppose that is okay until I have to start living with the consequences of chosen stupidity by other humans. It is to me mind blowing to consider some might choose ignorance rather than simply being ignorant.
 

Wombat

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
1,886
Likes
589
Location
Australia
#69
I've seriously heard it proclaimed that being stupid is a human right. I suppose that is okay until I have to start living with the consequences of chosen stupidity by other humans. It is to me mind blowing to consider some might choose ignorance rather than simply being ignorant.

If God could make a mistake it would probably be letting stupid or ignorant people not be aware of their stupidity or ignorance. :(
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,902
Likes
748
Location
UK
#70
Isn't there an irony in these recent comments? The very premise of the thread is that experts are everywhere, but in the end you believe the ones that you want to believe. Whether that's because they're aligned with your personal philosophy, or because you once had such a great musical experience with a valve amplifier that it has influenced your judgement ever since, or because Joe Bloggs, recording engineer, produced a great album by one of your musical heroes and he thinks that digital audio is too clinical, etc.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,902
Likes
748
Location
UK
#71
Perhaps the principle of the listening test should be applied to expertise.

Assemble a group of audiophiles and, following a familiarisation phase, individually and in highly controlled conditions, flash up onto a screen small selections of conflicting pronouncements from different audio experts. The audiophile can spend as long as he wants looking at each pronouncement, with a selector switch to go backwards or forwards. He is also able to change the text size, font and screen brightness at any time. When he is ready to make his vote for the winner of each group of pronouncements, he can select the one that he thinks is closest to the truth.

At the end, the votes are fed into a highly sophisticated statistical analysis from a statistics cookbook that produces the objective audio truth, with a confidence level.
 

Wombat

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
1,886
Likes
589
Location
Australia
#72
Perhaps the principle of the listening test should be applied to expertise.

Assemble a group of audiophiles and, following a familiarisation phase, individually and in highly controlled conditions, flash up onto a screen small selections of conflicting pronouncements from different audio experts. The audiophile can spend as long as he wants looking at each pronouncement, with a selector switch to go backwards or forwards. He is also able to change the text size, font, colour and screen brightness at any time. When he is ready to make his vote for the winner of each group of pronouncements, he can select the one that he thinks is closest to the truth.

At the end, the votes are fed into a highly sophisticated statistical analysis from a statistics cookbook that produces the objective audio truth, with a confidence level.

The drooping upper frequency response choice is popular. This is interesting as this choice is similar to early hearing loss onset which most of us would not want. :rolleyes:
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,902
Likes
748
Location
UK
#73
The drooping upper frequency response choice is popular.
I think that aiming for such a frequency response is the tail wagging the dog. This response is what you might measure in a certain kind of room with a certain kind of speaker that has been set up optimally for that speaker's characteristics. It does not mean that it is a recipe to be applied to all other rooms and speakers.

Far better to just set the speaker up optimally in the first place - and this means taking into account the speaker's foibles if it is not an ideal speaker.

Even better than this is to aim for close to the ideal, neutral speaker.
 

DonH56

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
1,721
Likes
1,075
Location
Monument, CO
#75
The whole anti-science movement is fueled by pretty much everyone who has something to gain by exploiting a group of people.
Alas, so is much of the science movement, speaking as one who was involved in R&D for a long time. Even the "pure" scientists follow the money in the form of contracts and grants, and gov't R&D is sometimes politically influenced IME/IMO. The problem of dueling experts has been with us for ages; is the Earth flat or round?
 

RayDunzl

Major Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
5,116
Likes
1,158
Location
Riverview, Fl
#76
is the Earth flat or round?
I would interject at this point that Round and Flat are not mutually exclusive, at least in my understanding.

Pizza. Round (traditionally), and Flat (especially thin-crust).

---

Oh well, I lose:

upload_2018-2-15_12-31-56.png


I like to spout first and research later. Makes posting more fun.
 

Phelonious Ponk

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
859
Likes
160
#77
Audiophiles want a hobby. Everything exists, no matter how stupid, because it allows them to have something to chase and perpetually tweak. Imagine people playing with a color slider endlessly to get just the right shade of red except the actual color was never changing. That is apparently ok to some because they believed it was changing.

Imagine how awful it would be if for a small amount of money you could buy a whole signal chain that is audibly transparent. Imagine if the Apple Homepod was the absolute highest fidelity and sets itself up all on it's own without you having to do anything. Instant high fidelity audio that anyone could get. What hobby could there possibly be when there is nothing to tweak and nothing to chase. How could there even be a community. My experience has been that the audiophile hobby is really an intoxicating mix of faith, consumerism and need of a community to be a part of.

This is why the audiophile hobby, no matter how much it says it cares about high fidelity, wants audio to be broken. If it's broken they've got something to fix. Digital audio is broken they say so buy a Yggdrasil to make it sound analog. If you want to make money you first need to invent a problem and then invent a solution. Same thing for a hobby.

Something to be aware of is that there are people who achieve their system ideal and at that point stop posting. Not surprising because there is nothing for them to care about if the differences from tweaking are not audible. These people become invisible in the constant tide of new forum posts but they still exist even when not seen.
“Myexperience has been that the audiophile hobby is really an intoxicating mix of faith, consumerism and need of a community to be a part of.”

Throw in a heavy dose of elitism, and that’s my impression as well.
 

Don Hills

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
524
Likes
145
Location
Wellington, New Zealand
#78
The drooping upper frequency response choice is popular. This is interesting as this choice is similar to early hearing loss onset which most of us would not want. :rolleyes:
I would have thought that a rising upper frequency response would be popular, to compensate for the "early hearing loss onset". Or have I misunderstood your point?
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
1,060
Likes
364
#79
“Myexperience has been that the audiophile hobby is really an intoxicating mix of faith, consumerism and need of a community to be a part of.”

Throw in a heavy dose of elitism, and that’s my impression as well.
I asked (something like this, I don'r remember exactly, but you get my point), on a forum, if members would be happy with "the magic system" that played back anything flawlessly. The system was to be invisible and cost, say, 1000 dollars.

People got angry. Didn't see the point of this question. And they were not sure if they would acquire "the magic system".
 

sergeauckland

Active Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
215
Likes
214
Location
Suffolk UK
#80
I asked (something like this, I don'r remember exactly, but you get my point), on a forum, if members would be happy with "the magic system" that played back anything flawlessly. The system was to be invisible and cost, say, 1000 dollars.

People got angry. Didn't see the point of this question. And they were not sure if they would acquire "the magic system".
It's much like the reasons why active loudspeakers aren't universally popular, and valves, vinyl and horns still have a following. There are those for whom a HiFi system IS the hobby, something to be tweaked and fiddled with, not a tool just for playing music.

Give these people the 'perfect' system, and they would have nothing to play with.
S
 
Top Bottom